The Fine tuning universe as evidence for creator ?

English is not my native language, I apologize for any misspellings.
I'm atheist but little part of my mind believe in creator. I didn't say God, I said creator.
Now, what I'm going to say next is not evidence for the Christian God or the Jewish God or whatever, I juts saying that make me kind of... show more English is not my native language, I apologize for any misspellings.

I'm atheist but little part of my mind believe in creator. I didn't say God, I said creator.

Now, what I'm going to say next is not evidence for the Christian God or the Jewish God or whatever, I juts saying that make me kind of believe in creator or a designer.

There is something called "Fine tuning universe". Everything in the beginning of the universe looked as if it was getting read for us, the gravity...etc should have been the exact tun for life to show up.

" Fine-tuning refers to the surprising precision of nature’s physical constants, and the beginning state of the Universe. To explain the present state of the universe, even the best scientific theories require that the physical constants of nature and the beginning state of the Universe have extremely precise values. "

"The more I examine the universe, and the details of its architecture, the more evidence I find that the Universe in some sense must have known we were coming." — Freeman Dyson

"A bottom-up approach to cosmology either requires one to postulate an initial state of the Universe that is carefully ﬁne-tuned — as if prescribed by an outside agency — or it requires one to invoke the notion of eternal inﬂation, a mighty speculative notion to the generation of many different Universes, which prevents one from predicting what a typical observer would see." — Stephen Hawking and Thomas Hertog2

Doesn't that prove somehow that there are a creator or some Intelligent designer ?

Entropically and statistically speaking, the fact that the universe exists in a state which naturally supports the development of life does not support the fact that the universe was fine tuned to life,

You're arguing the Strong Anthropic Principle. This isn't a bad argument for some sort of Creator in itself, but when used to support the existence of a theistic deity, you run into a massive problem.

"If you were to accept this argument, then the FAP would be the logical conclusion after the SAP, especially if you believe the Participatory Anthropic Principle as well. If the Universe is indeed made for the benefit of intelligence, and the Universe in fact needs intelligent observers to exist, then it would be in the Universe’s “interest” to keep intelligence going. Therefore, according to those who subscribe to this theory, intelligent life will never die out."

This is incompatible with the apocalyptic stories found in many religions, especially what is said in Revelation.

To say the universe was shaped for us, is to look at a puddle, note how the pothole perfectly accommodates it, despite its complex shape, correctly conclude it cant be a coincidence, but erroneously conclude it therefore must have been designed or intended for it.

That's silly, and when you consider why, you'll understand the problem with your reasoning.

We are the fluid thing within something which was here before us.

The illusion of tuning only stands up if you forget that water takes the shape of the hole it sits in, and assume that the puddle and its shape were intended to be as such, then a container made for it.

The fine tuning argument can be summarised as "if things were different, other things would be different."

To which the only necessary response is "things are the way they are, therefore so are other things."

The fine tuning argument is valid, but only if the universe only gets one chance of existing and can only be the way it is, in terms of physical constants, starting conditions, etc. We have no reason to think that either of those is true. There could be an infinite number of possible universes, most of which don't have life in them.

I don't find the fine tuning argument very credible. If you study evolution or evolutionary biology you see that evidence indicates life evolves in the conditions present rather than conditions being 'created' for it. There may be a range of conditions that are within limits for life but they vary and can arise in a place as large as the universe in some locations by natural odds. On the flip side a lot of the universe doesn't support life and even where it does the environments are often not stable long term and many species die out when conditions change. None of that seems to require or suggest a sentient god at work.

No. First, given an eternity within which to produce alternative universes with alternative balance(s) of laws, the likelihood of finding this particular balance of laws approaches 100%. Second, this universe is "fine tuned" to produce black holes. Life is a fringe, highly scarce byproduct of that tendency. Third, it is not obvious that the kind of life we see is the only (logically) possible form. A universe with different variables may well have simply produced a distinct form of life. Third, if statistical unlikelihood is used to argue for the need for a designer, then lotteries must be fixed, and the flour I recently dropped on the floor could only have formed the pattern it did on purpose. In other words, the fine tuning argument is basically the baseless claim that the more random something appears the less random it actually is. Finally, we should consider the alternative. Life formed in terms of the laws we see, so of course it fits them. This is no more surprising than (to paraphrase Douglas Adams) the fact that the water in a puddle happens to fit the hole its in.

Gods and magic are the most ludicrous things primitive man ever came up with to explain anything... he may as well have suggested that a one-eyed Turtle with the assistance of half a dozen near-naked, flat-chested Flamingos did it... ;)

Anonymous · 6 years ago

0

Thumbs up

1

Thumbs down

Report Abuse

Comment

Add a comment

Submit

· just now

The concept of a multiverse suggests such a huge number of separate universes that the precise details found in this one are not at all surprising.

To put it another way, if you flip a coin often enough, you will eventually get a sequence of 100 straight heads. Or a thousand. But it may take a very long time.

No, it doesn't. There's multiple explanations that don't invoke a creator. You're committing the argument from ignorance (or personal incredulity) fallacy. Basically you can't think of, or believe, a different explanation, so with no direct evidence you're just going with "god did it."